Posted by Lou Pilder on July 24, 2011, at 7:11:23
In reply to Re: Do Antidepressants Really Work? / Rebuttal » Phillipa, posted by jedi on July 23, 2011, at 3:31:09
> > Just googled this and was amazed at the myraid of articles on this subject just picked one but seems most said the same. Phillipa
> >
> > http://www.newsweek.com/2010/01/28/the-depressing-news-about-antidepressants.html
>
>
> Two sides to every story
> Google search of rebuttals to this specific Newsweek article.
> Jedi
>
> A Doctor Disagrees
> Antidepressants have helped not only my patients, but myself.
> rebuttal by psychiatrist Robert Klitzman, MD
> http://www.newsweek.com/2010/01/29/a-doctor-disagrees.html
>
> Newsweeks Topsy-Turvy Take on Antidepressants
> By Ronald Pies, MD, Editor in Chief | February 8, 2010
> Psychiatric Times
> http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/home/content/article/10168/1520550
>
> The dangers of not treating depression are so great that any responsible physician will err on the side of caution and prescribe antidepressants.
> Elizabeth Hinds,
> Morris, Minn.
>
> As a psychopharmacologist who treats patients, I feel Sharon Begley does a disservice to those who live with depression. She bases her argument largely on two meta-analyses by Irving Kirsch and Guy Sapirstein. The psychiatric community understands that meta-analyses, which combine different medications and methodologies (as in Kirsch and Sapirstein's research), or which handpick studies and exclude others (as did, in my view, the recent JAMApaper published by Jay C. Fournier of the University of Pennsylvania and his colleagues), are susceptible to biased interpretations. The research that practitioners use to determine how to treat their patients is based on analyses that require statistically proven effectiveness. Those of us who treat patients on a daily basis understand that medications are not magic pills, and that treatment combining antidepressant medication with psychotherapy offers patients the best chance of recovery.
> Julie Hatterer, M.D.,
> American Psychiatric Association Council on Communications, New York, N.Y.
>
> Antidepressants do work when administered to patients who really suffer from depression. The problem is that many people who are not clinically depressed are being administered medication. That's because Big Pharma dominates medical education and aggressively targets the public through advertisements, as if medication were candy.
> Stergios Kaprinis, M.D.,
> Thessaloniki, Greece
>
> As a psychiatrist who has spent more of the last 35 years taking patients off antidepressants than putting patients on them, I was gratified by your article. Nonetheless, placebo-driven or not, these drugs can still be a valuable tool in our therapeutic armory. The key is to precisely determine which individuals are the right fit. In the struggle with emotional duress, it is always better to have more arrows in the quiver than fewer.
> Isaac Steven Herschkopf, M.D.,
> NYU School of Medicine, New York, N.Y.
>
> I have suffered from severe depression for years. The combination of antidepressants and therapy has saved my life.
> Jessica Knowles, Bethesda, Md.
>
>
>
> Newsweek: Do Antidepressants Work? For Many People, YES!
> posted by Beyond Blue | 10:00 amThursday February 4, 2010
>
> I admire Newsweek writer Sharon Begleys work especially when she explains ways we can try to rewire our brain. But I found last weeks cover story irresponsible. If, for no other reason, than its title and subtitle: The Depressing News About Antidepressants: Studies Suggest That the Popular Drugs Are No More Effective Than a Placebo. In Fact, They May Be Worse.
>
> Then I may as well kill myself.
>
> Thats how I would have read the article four years ago, before I started questioning all the information available today on mood disorders and drug treatment, before I started working with a physician from Johns Hopkins who could help me tease out the hope from articles like this, so I wasnt tempted to take my life upon reading there was no way out of the darkness.
>
> In fact, on the way to my consultation at the Johns Hopkins Mood Disorders Clinic, I read a similar article in O magazine: a compilation of interviews with folks about how antidepressants zap creativity, dull emotions, destroy creativity, flatten libidos, and a list of other things. Shaking with anxiety and tears coming down my face, I almost told Eric to turn around, that I was foolish to think that there was hope for me, that I was a lost case, and that, if the article was right, I would only be making matters worse.
>
> Thank God I threw the article into the backseat and went on with my consultation.
>
> I dont know why the main body of research behind the article is so surprising: antidepressants work better for those with severe depression than for those who suffer from mild to moderate depression. Cant we say that as part of the subtitle, to help out the folks who are banking on medical intervention to lighten their crushing and burdensome load?
>
> Ive always maintained that if a person has mild to moderate depression, then he should start with his diet, sleep, exercise. Try yoga or some acupuncture sessions. In many cases, thats enough!
>
> For folks like me, though, who are/were hanging on to life by a very thin and fraying thread, antidepressants can save lives. They have certainly given me back my life. I know that. Because I tried absolutely everything else I could to make the death thoughts go away, and they continued to stalk me until I found the right medication combination. Now, instead of putting 95 percent of my energy into NOT taking my life, I can invest it into helping others not take their own lives and to giving back. Which is why I think magazines like Newsweek, with so much power over the information we process, should be more careful than to say: Sorry folks, for those of you so desperate, well, you may as well give up and take a gun to your head.
>
> John Grohol of Psychcentral always provides a number of insights to media stories with unfortunate sticking power. In a recent post, Are Antidepressants Really That Ineffective? he writes:
>
> Newsweeks Sharon Begley has a lengthy article discussing the growing body of evidence that calls into question decades worth of prescriptions. It seems to be journalists favorite go to story now in mental health, because theres a black-and-white controversy do antidepressants work or dont they?
>
> People mistakenly believe that one type of research is somehow superior to another form of research. However, data is data and research is research. All things being equal, if its done in as objective a manner a human being can do it, then its all good and informative. A study conducted 20 years ago is just as valid today, as long as the design of the study was solid and unbiased. And a single-case experimental design, while not very generalizable, can still lead and has led to valuable insights into human behavior.
>
> So I get a little concerned when we do give more weight to the most recent study, or the most recent meta-analysis. They have their place, but their place is in context understanding the body of research as a whole. (Because meta-analyses never take into account the entire body of research on a drug or topic they always have inclusion and exclusion criteria, criteria that can directly impact the results they find.)
>
> To see another article about this issue go round and round the bend with both sides, but not really bringing anything new to the discussion, is a little frustrating. I think its pretty obvious that if a drug was supposed to help people, but didnt, people would stop taking it and doctors would eventually stop prescribing it. Since its unethical to prescribe placebos to patients outside of a research study, what choice do doctors and patients have the drug works. (Well, not always, of course, but in many people who take it, and who keep trying a different antidepressant if the first one doesnt work, according to the results of the STAR*D study.)
>
> In other words, can we please get back to a forest view of mood disorders so that, while were busy analyzing the lady bug on the bark of a tree, we dont miss the guy with one leg off the bridge? Antidepressants arent fool proof. Unfortunately. Sometimes you have to try a few before you feel relief, and for some people (especially those who suffer from mild to moderate depression, that can benefit more from other kinds of therapies), SSRIs might not work at all.
>
> But let me say this loud and clear: There is hope. Depression is treatable. It is, as William Sytron wrote in his classic, Darkness Visible, conquerable. And much of that has to do with the drugs that are available today.
>
> Friends,
It is written here tht John Grohol wrote,[...I think..that if a drug was supposed to help people but it didn't, people would stop taking it and doctors.. would stop prescribing it...].
>
> I have tried to help people on Mr. Grohol's site but ran into a huge resistance to my perspective from him and his deputies. In fact, most of my posts were deleted by them but I have copies and his emails for anyone that wants to see those.
Now in what Mr. Grohol has written that is posted here, he writes what could have the potential to lead people to think that if the drugs in question are being precribed, and people are ttaking them, then they are helping people. But is his statement true?
Let us look here at all the people that are posting that these drugs are not helping them. Then there are the 40,000 people or so that die each year from psychotropic drugs. And then there are the people that kill themselves while on the drug or when withdrawing from the drug. Then there are the people that have life-ruining conditions as a result of taking these drugs. Then there are the people that have to go through a horrible withdrawal to rid themdelves of these drugs. Then there are the people that are led to believe that they are the master race/religion and that only their kind can have eternal life or forgivness. Those people that live in a community that fosters that, and take psychotropic drugs, could go into a mind-alterd state to comit mass-murder, thinking that they are doing what will be good for the community as a whole. They could be led to believe that communities are not to be pluristic and go out and kill those that have beliefs that they do not accept the claim of those that get the master-race mind-set from their community leaders as then the mind-set becomes state-sponsord.
How many deaths does it take before one can see that too many people have died?
And how many years must psychiatrists (redacted by resondent) while people pretend that they just (redacted by respondent)? And how many years will it take for people to see that mind-altering drugs can kill you? Then ask yourselves why people take these drugs and why doctors prescribe them when people die from them or could get a life-ruining condition. Is it because they {work}? Or are there other reasons?
Lou
poster:Lou Pilder
thread:991624
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/20110714/msgs/991692.html